1. Undergraduate Consultation: Opportunities and Challenges John Paxton Montana State University – Bozeman October 15, 2005 Seventh Annual CCSC-NW Conference

2. Outline Course Overview Course Overview Course Evaluation Course Evaluation Questions and Comments Questions and Comments

3. Course Overview Undergraduate Consultation, CS 474 Undergraduate Consultation, CS 474 1 Credit 1 Credit Prerequisite: Junior Standing Prerequisite: Junior Standing Required for students who began prior to Fall 2005 Required for students who began prior to Fall 2005 An elective for students who began in Fall 2005 or later An elective for students who began in Fall 2005 or later

4. Course Duties Assist with a weekly two hour laboratory Assist with a weekly two hour laboratory CS 160 (Introduction to Programming) CS 160 (Introduction to Programming) CS 221 (Beginning Data Structures) CS 221 (Beginning Data Structures) CS 222 (Discrete Mathematics) CS 222 (Discrete Mathematics) CS 223 (Advanced Data Structures) CS 223 (Advanced Data Structures) CS 150 (Computer Literacy) – Open Lab CS 150 (Computer Literacy) – Open Lab Send a weekly report that describes the consulting experience Send a weekly report that describes the consulting experience Write a three page paper Write a three page paper

5. Consulting in Action

6. Universal Outcomes 1. Improve ability to apply one’s knowledge of computer science 2. Better understand professional responsibilities 3. Improve ability to communicate 4. Better understand the need for lifelong learning

7. Secondary Outcomes Improve one’s ability to design, implement and debug programs Improve one’s ability to design, implement and debug programs Improve one’s ability to utilize mathematics in the context of CS Improve one’s ability to utilize mathematics in the context of CS Improve one’s ability to design and conduct experiments Improve one’s ability to design and conduct experiments

8. Similar Experiences Teaching Computer Science, 4 credits, Stanford University. Elective. Teaching Computer Science, 4 credits, Stanford University. Elective. Teaching Techniques for Computer Science, 1 credit, University of California – Berkeley. Required for all students who teach. An elective for all others. Teaching Techniques for Computer Science, 1 credit, University of California – Berkeley. Required for all students who teach. An elective for all others. Paid experience, University of Arizona (Stuart Reges). Optional experience for undergraduates. Paid experience, University of Arizona (Stuart Reges). Optional experience for undergraduates.

9. Course Evaluation Consultants Consultants Students Students Instructors and TAs Instructors and TAs Outsiders Outsiders

10. Consultant Evaluation 1 = strongly disagree 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 3 = neutral 4 = agree 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree 5 = strongly agree

11. Consultant Evaluation OutcomeApplyCS Prof. Resp. Commun icate Lifelong Learning Closed Lab (14) 4.44.14.14.1 Open Lab (6) 3.33.83.34.0

12. Consultant Evaluation The course should be required The course is valuable Closed Lab 4.13.8 Open Lab 4.13.7

13. Consultant Evaluation – General Comments The course should be 2 credits The course should be 2 credits A mandatory preparation period should be added A mandatory preparation period should be added Open labs are more difficult to prepare for Open labs are more difficult to prepare for Sometimes not many students come to the open lab Sometimes not many students come to the open lab

14. Consultant Evaluation - Benefits Learning about different thought processes Learning about different thought processes Becoming a better problem solver Becoming a better problem solver Seeing how much one has learned Seeing how much one has learned Learning to help more effectively Learning to help more effectively Learning patience Learning patience Recapturing the joy of learning a topic for the first time Recapturing the joy of learning a topic for the first time

15. Consultant Evaluation - Challenges Being prepared Being prepared Helping, but not helping too much Helping, but not helping too much Feeling uncomfortable when viewed as an expert Feeling uncomfortable when viewed as an expert

16. Student Evaluation How often could the consultant help? Was the consultant clear? Was the consultant courteous? Closed Lab for CS 222 (44) 78%84%94%

17. Student Evaluation - Benefits The consultants could spend longer helping The consultants could spend longer helping The consultants were enthusiastic The consultants were enthusiastic The consultants were more approachable The consultants were more approachable

18. Student Evaluation - Challenges The consultants should be better prepared The consultants should be better prepared The consultants should listen more carefully The consultants should listen more carefully The consultants need to be more confident The consultants need to be more confident The consultants need to circulate through the lab regularly The consultants need to circulate through the lab regularly The consultants need to provide the reasoning behind their answers, not just the answer The consultants need to provide the reasoning behind their answers, not just the answer

19. Instructor Evaluation Outcome Apply CS Prof. Resp. Commun icate Lifelong Learning Faculty (4) 4.54.24.74.0 Closed Lab (14) 4.44.14.14.1 Open Lab (6) 3.33.83.34.0

20. Instructor Evaluation The course should be required The course is valuable Faculty4.04.7 Closed Lab 4.13.8 Open Lab 4.13.7

21. TA Evaluation How often could the consultant help? Was the consultant clear? Was the consultant courteous? TAs for CS 222 (3) 85%92%98% Closed Lab for CS 222 (44) 78%84%94%

22. Outside Evaluation – SIGCSE Listserv Questionnaire on 10/23/04 Should this course be required? Should this course be required? Yes – ACM CC2001 encourages cooperative learning Yes – ACM CC2001 encourages cooperative learning No No Should this course be an elective? Should this course be an elective? Yes Yes

23. Outside Evaluation - Listserv What are the strengths? What are the strengths? One of the most effective ways to learn is to teach One of the most effective ways to learn is to teach Lower division students get extra assistance Lower division students get extra assistance Helps identify undergraduates for paid teaching positions Helps identify undergraduates for paid teaching positions

24. Outside Evaluation – Listserv What are the weaknesses? What are the weaknesses? Some consultants might not be very good at helping others. This could disadvantage the helped students. Some consultants might not be very good at helping others. This could disadvantage the helped students. The course might be perceived as free labor for the department. The course might be perceived as free labor for the department. The course does not appear to be terribly demanding. Students are not learning upper division CS content. The course does not appear to be terribly demanding. Students are not learning upper division CS content.

25. Outside Evaluation – ABET (Fall 2004) The course is non-standard compared to other CS programs The course is non-standard compared to other CS programs The course should be an elective and not count towards the upper division credits requirement of ABET The course should be an elective and not count towards the upper division credits requirement of ABET

26. Significant Changes Starting in Spring 2005, consultants are only placed in closed labs Starting in Spring 2005, consultants are only placed in closed labs Starting in Fall 2005, the course is an elective Starting in Fall 2005, the course is an elective

27. Thank you! Are there any questions or comments? Are there any questions or comments?